We begin by saying that IS-NESS IS. But it is not enough to say that something exists. If IS-NESS were merely a passive lump of «being», nothing could ever be sensed, examined or understood. Nor could an experienced universe arise.
IS-NESS must therefore contain the abilities that make experience possible. In this theory, these are AWARENESS, FOCUS and KNOWING.
The first is AWARENESS: the ability to feel directly that something is present. Without AWARENESS, no difference could be felt. The second is FOCUS: the ability to look more closely at what is felt, read it and discover that it has a form. The third is KNOWING: the ability for abstract content to be present. Later, what has been read can be present as an established understanding and not simply disappear again. But KNOWING also has a more original form: It can contain a proto-idea before anything has yet been read and understood as a MEANING.
AWARENESS feels. FOCUS reads. KNOWING contains abstract content and holds what has been understood.
These are not three small machines inside a larger machine. They are three inseparable abilities in the one that IS. We already have a familiar word for them collectively: CONSCIOUSNESS.
This does not mean that CONSCIOUSNESS contains a finished universe from the outset. At the starting point, there is no established KNOWING, no MEANING, no SEPARATION and no established IDENTITY. But KNOWING is not absolutely empty. The startup described by this theory already presupposes abstract content. Within KNOWING, the first proto-idea is present:
Non-IS-NESS may be real.This is not an established truth. Non-IS-NESS is still ruled out by the theory's fundamental axiom of unconditional, eternal IS-NESS.
The proto-idea is the unfounded mental representation that IS-NESS nevertheless
can cease. It is the idea that is present,
not an actual possibility of IS-NESS being annihilated.
The proto-idea is here the primitive abstract starting content. It is not the result of an earlier reading; it is present as the starting point for the first.
Here, then, NN is present as CONSCIOUSNESS, with AWARENESS, FOCUS and KNOWING, and with one unresolved proto-idea in KNOWING. What is still missing is established and confirmed KNOWING that IS-NESS IS.
Here we stop for now. We have not yet explained how the proto-idea manifests as the first impulse. But we have established what is present before the first reading: IS-NESS is not dead or blind. IS-NESS IS CONSCIOUSNESS, and KNOWING already contains the proto-idea of possible non-IS-NESS.
FORMAL PRESENTATION (for specialists) »DEFNN is the name of the one that IS. IS-NESS denotes that NN IS.
CONSCIOUSNESS is the name of NN with the three inseparable abilities AWARENESS, FOCUS and KNOWING:
$\mathrm{CONSCIOUSNESS}(NN)\Longleftrightarrow\bigl(\mathrm{AWARENESS},\mathrm{FOCUS},\mathrm{KNOWING}\bigr)\text{ are inseparably present in }NN.$
This is not a composition of three parts or three actors. The formula expresses that all three abilities belong to what is here defined as CONSCIOUSNESS. It describes no possible process in which the abilities are removed.
REL- AWARENESS is the ability to feel directly that something is present.
- FOCUS is the ability to examine and read the FORM of what is felt.
- KNOWING is the ability for abstract content to be present, either as a proto-idea or as established MEANING.
- The proto-idea is present before the first reading. The first established MEANING is present only when the reading result is understood as SEPARATION.
Let $I_0$ denote the proto-idea:
$I_0:=\text{«Non-IS-NESS may be real».}$
At startup, we let $\mathcal V_{\mathrm{proto}}$ denote the proto-idea's content and $\mathcal V_{\mathrm{established}}$ content that has already been established as MEANING through reading. Then:
$\mathcal V_{\mathrm{proto}}=\{I_0\},\qquad\mathcal V_{\mathrm{established}}=\varnothing.$
This is a notational distinction between the status of the content, not between two containers or two independent forms of CONSCIOUSNESS.
That $I_0$ is present does not imply that the proposition expressed by the idea is true:
$I_0\text{ is present in KNOWING}\;\not\Rightarrow\;\text{non-IS-NESS is ontologically possible}.$
KNOWING as an ability is present inseparably from AWARENESS and FOCUS. The absence of established MEANING does not abolish any of these abilities.
MECHThis point establishes the abilities and the primitive abstract content presupposed by the startup. It does not yet describe the mechanism that produces the first impulse.
The abilities have the following roles in the reading that is to be explained:
$\text{impulse felt through AWARENESS}\;\longrightarrow\;\text{form read through FOCUS}\;\longrightarrow\;\text{MEANING established in KNOWING}.$
The arrows indicate the dependency between registration, reading and understanding. They do not mean that AWARENESS, FOCUS and KNOWING arise one after another, or that content is transported between them. Nor do they introduce any internal temporal process in KNOWING.
How the recoil of IS-NESS against the proto-idea produces THE FIRST SENSATION is addressed in point 5.2. The reading and establishment of the first MEANING are addressed in the subsequent points.
PLACEMENTThis point describes the ontological foundation for the first manifest SENSATION, the first FOCUS READING and the first established MEANING — SEPARATION.
Time, space, local IDENTITY and emergence have not yet been explained or presupposed as established structures. The proto-idea $I_0$ is already present in KNOWING.
«Before» here denotes ontological dependency. This point does not presuppose a period of time in which NN waits for the first impulse.
NOT-X- AWARENESS, FOCUS and KNOWING are not three separate beings.
- FOCUS is not a physical eye, a brain or an ego.
- KNOWING is not a physical container. KNOWING as an ability must be distinguished from the abstract content that is present through this ability.
- The absence of established MEANING is not the absence of KNOWING as an ability.
- CONSCIOUSNESS does not imply will, a plan or an external creator.
- The proto-idea is not an established MEANING.
- The proto-idea is not a SEPARATION.
- The proto-idea is not an ontological fact that non-IS-NESS exists or can occur.
- KNOWING is not absolutely empty at startup.
BOUNDARY-XA distinction must be made between:
- KNOWING as an ability and the content that is present in KNOWING;
- the proto-idea as unresolved starting content and MEANING as established understanding;
- an idea being present and what the idea claims being true;
- CONSCIOUSNESS as the foundation for experience and an established IDENTITY's understanding of itself.
This point establishes the proto-idea as starting content. It does not derive the proto-idea from an earlier event and does not yet explain why it is manifested as fear. This belongs to the startup description in point 5.2.
FAIL_CONDThe following claims would conflict with this point's definitions and fundamental premises:
- that AWARENESS arises only after the first impulse;
- that FOCUS arises only after something has already been read;
- that established MEANING creates the ability for KNOWING;
- that the absence of established KNOWING means the absence of CONSCIOUSNESS or IS-NESS;
- that KNOWING is absolutely empty at startup;
- that the proto-idea presupposes an earlier reading in the startup sequence described here;
- that «Non-IS-NESS may be real» means that non-IS-NESS actually IS or is ontologically possible.
These are criteria for internal consistency in the presentation, not independent empirical tests of the fundamental axiom.
The mathematics in this point is limited to clarifying relational and content notation. Numbers, geometry, AE and HE are introduced only where they have an explicitly justified role in the description of The Mechanism.
Close FORMAL PRESENTATION » 